- From: Emilio Cobos Álvarez via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2025 18:37:34 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Anyway, based on the feedback, here's a revised proposed resolution: > > ``` > Proposed resolution: For an element E being matched by :hover, :active, :focus-within, or > :target-within, flat tree descendants D that match the pseudo-class, but that are in the top > layer (at a later position in the top layer stack, if E is also in the top layer) do not cause E > to match the selector. In this case, all flat tree descendants of D also do not cause E to > match the selector. > ``` > > Sound better? The wording is tricky, but hopefully the above captures the important bits. I think that wording is technically correct, but unnecessarily complex (I had misread it actually). It's probably better to change the spec to work like implementations, in terms of ancestors, so something like: > An element matching `:hover` (or `:active` etc) also causes all flat tree ancestors **up to the first top layer element or the root element**, inclusive, to match that pseudo-class. I think that wording is a lot clearer and would match how implementations work too. If you agree they are equivalent, I agree that's the right thing to do :) -- GitHub Notification of comment by emilio Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11185#issuecomment-2631772425 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 3 February 2025 18:37:35 UTC